CR-5330-2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (202) Surinder Pal Kaur and another Sat Pal and another CORAM: Present: ALOK JAIN 1. petition was dismissed vide order dated 07.05.2013, however, by virtue of order passed by remanded back to the High Court and thereafter was adjourned application. 2. was listed on 02.02.2023 and both the parties were put to notice. Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate appeared Mr. Gaurav Gaur, Advocate appeared on behalf of 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Surinder Pal Kaur and another Versus Sat Pal and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN **** None for the petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Gaur, Advocate for Mr. S.M. Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 2 **** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) A perusal of the record reveals was dismissed vide order dated 07.05.2013, however, by virtue of order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 13.01.2015 the matter was remanded back to the High Court and thereafter was adjourned sine die with liberty to the parties to move an appropriate application. Nothing was done for 8 long years on 02.02.2023 and both the parties were put to notice. Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate appeared on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Gaurav Gaur, Advocate appeared on behalf of 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-5330-2002 Date of Decision:- 05.02.2025 ……Petitioners ……Respondents ALOK JAIN Mr. Gaurav Gaur, Advocate for Mr. S.M. Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 2 reveals that the present revision was dismissed vide order dated 07.05.2013, however, by virtue of the Hon’ble Apex Court on 13.01.2015 the matter was remanded back to the High Court and thereafter, on 05.08.2015 this matter with liberty to the parties to move an appropriate Nothing was done for 8 long years and thereafter, the matter on 02.02.2023 and both the parties were put to notice. Thereafter, on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Gaurav Gaur, Advocate appeared on behalf of Mr. S.M. Sharma, 1 2002 05.02.2025 s s that the present revision was dismissed vide order dated 07.05.2013, however, by virtue of the Hon’ble Apex Court on 13.01.2015 the matter was this matter with liberty to the parties to move an appropriate the matter Thereafter, on behalf of the petitioners and r. S.M. Sharma, PARUL 2025.02.11 14:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CR-5330-2002 Advocate for the respondents as recorded in the order dated 10.03.2023, wherein, counsel for the petitioner expired and sought time to move effort has been made and almost two years have gone. representation on behalf of the petitioner the last date of hearing also petitioner to move an appropriate application for impleading the legal heirs of petitioner No. 1. 3. doesn’t seem dismissed for non appropriate application for impleadment and if any cogent cause of action survives, within 05.02.2025 Parul 2002 Advocate for the respondents as recorded in the order dated 10.03.2023, wherein, counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner No. 1 has d sought time to move an appropriate application. effort has been made and almost two years have gone. representation on behalf of the petitioner on most of the occasions and on the last date of hearing also i.e. on 05.12.2024 time was granted to the petitioner to move an appropriate application for impleading the legal heirs of petitioner No. 1. In light of the above factual matrix, since, the petitioner seem to be diligent in pursuing the matter, accordingl dismissed for non-prosecution with liberty to seek its revival by filing appropriate application for impleadment and if any cogent cause of action within a period of six months from today Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable:- 2 Advocate for the respondents as recorded in the order dated 10.03.2023, submitted that petitioner No. 1 has appropriate application. Since then, no effort has been made and almost two years have gone. More so, there is no on most of the occasions and on 2.2024 time was granted to the petitioner to move an appropriate application for impleading the legal heirs In light of the above factual matrix, since, the petitioner to be diligent in pursuing the matter, accordingly the same is with liberty to seek its revival by filing appropriate application for impleadment and if any cogent cause of action period of six months from today. (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Yes/No 2 Advocate for the respondents as recorded in the order dated 10.03.2023, submitted that petitioner No. 1 has Since then, no More so, there is no on most of the occasions and on 2.2024 time was granted to the petitioner to move an appropriate application for impleading the legal heirs In light of the above factual matrix, since, the petitioner y the same is with liberty to seek its revival by filing appropriate application for impleadment and if any cogent cause of action PARUL 2025.02.11 14:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document